New OpenBSD wireless driver!

[n0cmonkey]

Link to announcement. I think I'll pick up one or two of these.

Here's the list of drivers:

an (4) - Aironet Communications 4500/4800 IEEE 802.11FH/b wireless network
ath (4) - Atheros IEEE 802.11a/b/g wireless network
atu (4) - Atmel AT76C50x USB IEEE 802.11b wireless network
atw (4) - ADMtek ADM8211 IEEE 802.11b wireless network
awi (4) - BayStack 650 IEEE 802.11FH PCMCIA wireless network
ipw (4) - Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 IEEE 802.11b wireless network
iwi (4) - Intel PRO/Wireless 2200BG/2225BG/2915ABG IEEE 802.11a/b/g wireless network
ral (4) - Ralink Technology RT2500 IEEE 802.11a/b/g wireless network
ray (4) - Raytheon Raylink/WebGear Aviator IEEE 802.11FH wireless network
rln (4) - Proxim RangeLAN2 IEEE 802.11b wireless network
rtw (4) - Realtek 8180 IEEE 802.11b wireless network
ural (4) - Ralink Technology RT2570 USB IEEE 802.11a/b/g wireless network
wi (4) - WaveLAN/IEEE, PRISM 2-3, and Spectrum24 IEEE 802.11b wireless network

How does Linux compare? If I get time maybe I'll look into what the vanilla kernel supports and also what 3rd party patches support. :beer:

EDIT: Email with list of hardware with this ralink chip.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Since Linux's documentation is non-existant, this is the best I could come up with:

arionet 4500/4800 OpenBSD Linux
Atheros OpenBSD
Atmel AT76C50x OpenBSD Linux
ADMtek ADM8211 OpenBSD
BayStack 650 OpenBSD
Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 OpenBSD
Intel PRO/Wireless 2200BG/2225BG/2915ABG OpenBSD
Ralink Technology RT2500 OpenBSD
Raytheon Raylink OpenBSD Linux
Proxim RangeLAN2 OpenBSD
Realtek 8180 OpenBSD
Ralink Technology RT2570 OpenBSD
WaveLAN/IEEE OpenBSD Linux
Prism 2/Orinoco(?) OpenBSD Linux
Prism 3 OpenBSD
Spectrum24 OpenBSD
Planet WL 3501 Linux
Netwave Airsurfer Linux (Experimental)

 

[n0cmonkey]

Amazing!

 

[Nothinman]

How many of those drivers still require you to download firmware seperately?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman
How many of those drivers still require you to download firmware seperately?

2, the Intel ones. The other firmwares are freely distributable, the OpenBSD community made sure of that. :beer:

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Since Linux's documentation is non-existant, this is the best I could come up with:

arionet 4500/4800 OpenBSD Linux
Atheros OpenBSD
Atmel AT76C50x OpenBSD Linux
ADMtek ADM8211 OpenBSD
BayStack 650 OpenBSD
Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 OpenBSD
Intel PRO/Wireless 2200BG/2225BG/2915ABG OpenBSD
Ralink Technology RT2500 OpenBSD
Raytheon Raylink OpenBSD Linux
Proxim RangeLAN2 OpenBSD
Realtek 8180 OpenBSD
Ralink Technology RT2570 OpenBSD
WaveLAN/IEEE OpenBSD Linux
Prism 2/Orinoco(?) OpenBSD Linux
Prism 3 OpenBSD
Spectrum24 OpenBSD
Planet WL 3501 Linux
Netwave Airsurfer Linux (Experimental)

In all fairness to Linux, it's strongest point is it's community.

If the documentation itself is not readily available, google helps you find folks who have had the same problems and most of the time someone has replied with potential solutions.

Google and open source forums.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
In all fairness to Linux, it's strongest point is it's community.

If the documentation itself is not readily available, google helps you find folks who have had the same problems and most of the time someone has replied with potential solutions.

Google and open source forums.

It's a band-aid for a missing limb.

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
In all fairness to Linux, it's strongest point is it's community.

If the documentation itself is not readily available, google helps you find folks who have had the same problems and most of the time someone has replied with potential solutions.

Google and open source forums.

It's a band-aid for a missing limb.

or isn't it just another form of "documentation"?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
In all fairness to Linux, it's strongest point is it's community.

If the documentation itself is not readily available, google helps you find folks who have had the same problems and most of the time someone has replied with potential solutions.

Google and open source forums.

It's a band-aid for a missing limb.

or isn't it just another form of "documentation"?

No. Documentation isn't really interactive in the initial steps. Maybe another form of "bad documentation," but doesn't Linux already have enough of that?

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
In all fairness to Linux, it's strongest point is it's community.

If the documentation itself is not readily available, google helps you find folks who have had the same problems and most of the time someone has replied with potential solutions.

Google and open source forums.

It's a band-aid for a missing limb.

or isn't it just another form of "documentation"?

No. Documentation isn't really interactive in the initial steps. Maybe another form of "bad documentation," but doesn't Linux already have enough of that?

why...you....little.......

(ie, I have no good comeback for that )

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
why...you....little.......

(ie, I have no good comeback for that )

:gloat;

The intention of me putting the Linux info in there wasn't for gloating or anything though. I was just curious as to how the wireless support stacked up between the two. Maybe I'll start hunting down the hundreds of 3rd party patches that provide functionality soon...

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
why...you....little.......

(ie, I have no good comeback for that )

:gloat;

The intention of me putting the Linux info in there wasn't for gloating or anything though. I was just curious as to how the wireless support stacked up between the two. Maybe I'll start hunting down the hundreds of 3rd party patches that provide functionality soon...

are you slowly turning into a linux user? or is this for experimentation only?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
why...you....little.......

(ie, I have no good comeback for that )

:gloat;

The intention of me putting the Linux info in there wasn't for gloating or anything though. I was just curious as to how the wireless support stacked up between the two. Maybe I'll start hunting down the hundreds of 3rd party patches that provide functionality soon...

are you slowly turning into a linux user? or is this for experimentation only?

Curiosity only. Linux users claim that Linux has better hardware support, but I'm not so sure that's entirely true.

 

[Hyperblaze]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
why...you....little.......

(ie, I have no good comeback for that )

:gloat;

The intention of me putting the Linux info in there wasn't for gloating or anything though. I was just curious as to how the wireless support stacked up between the two. Maybe I'll start hunting down the hundreds of 3rd party patches that provide functionality soon...

are you slowly turning into a linux user? or is this for experimentation only?

Curiosity only. Linux users claim that Linux has better hardware support, but I'm not so sure that's entirely true.

You could just find out which has more support for mainstream hardware.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Hyperblaze
why...you....little.......

(ie, I have no good comeback for that )

:gloat;

The intention of me putting the Linux info in there wasn't for gloating or anything though. I was just curious as to how the wireless support stacked up between the two. Maybe I'll start hunting down the hundreds of 3rd party patches that provide functionality soon...

are you slowly turning into a linux user? or is this for experimentation only?

Curiosity only. Linux users claim that Linux has better hardware support, but I'm not so sure that's entirely true.

You could just find out which has more support for mainstream hardware.

I did. OpenBSD seems to support more wireless chipsets.

Where's the list though? That's the problem, there is no list of what hardware is supported by Linux. OpenBSD's i386 list

 

[bersl2]

Well, let's see. I told you before that the Atheros drivers are GPL-compatable except for the HAL, which is closed in order to comply with an FCC regulation. The Ralink driver is currently undergoing a full rewrite, but it's all GPL. Probably could be put into the mm patchset some time after that.

If you want a list, honestly, the kernel even points you here.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: bersl2
Well, let's see. I told you before that the Atheros drivers are GPL-compatable except for the HAL, which is closed in order to comply with an FCC regulation.

It's not in the kernel, which is what I wanted. Drivers not in the kernel don't interest me.

OpenBSD has an Open/Free HAL. The world isn't regulated by the FCC.

The Ralink driver is currently undergoing a full rewrite, but it's all GPL. Probably could be put into the mm patchset some time after that.

I'll add it to that list when it is.

 

[bersl2]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: bersl2
Well, let's see. I told you before that the Atheros drivers are GPL-compatable except for the HAL, which is closed in order to comply with an FCC regulation.

It's not in the kernel, which is what I wanted. Drivers not in the kernel don't interest me.

OpenBSD has an Open/Free HAL. The world isn't regulated by the FCC.

[/quote]

Just for kicks you can read what they have to say about the HAL rewrite (and I suspect that they have fielded this question many times before this...)

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: bersl2

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: bersl2
Well, let's see. I told you before that the Atheros drivers are GPL-compatable except for the HAL, which is closed in order to comply with an FCC regulation.

It's not in the kernel, which is what I wanted. Drivers not in the kernel don't interest me.

OpenBSD has an Open/Free HAL. The world isn't regulated by the FCC.

Just for kicks you can read what they have to say about the HAL rewrite (and I suspect that they have fielded this question many times before this...)[/quote]

> I think the OpenBSD approach in very sensible!

I think it is harmful to madwifi.

:laugh: Madwifi doesn't do anything for OpenBSD. A closed HAL is unacceptable in OpenBSD's source tree.

What I"ve seen isn"t very impressive, and it seems to miss LOTS of features that are needed to get a minimal working driver supporting all current chipset revisions.

I don't know about the validity of this, but it is:
1. a reverse engineered product
2. NEW
They can't expect it to be feature complete this early in the game. :beer:

They also don't seem to care about being free or open, so I'll ignore them for the most part from now on. I'll stick to OpenBSD where free means something.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Link to announcement. I think I'll pick up one or two of these.

Here's the list of drivers:

an (4) - Aironet Communications 4500/4800 IEEE 802.11FH/b wireless network
ath (4) - Atheros IEEE 802.11a/b/g wireless network
atu (4) - Atmel AT76C50x USB IEEE 802.11b wireless network
atw (4) - ADMtek ADM8211 IEEE 802.11b wireless network
awi (4) - BayStack 650 IEEE 802.11FH PCMCIA wireless network
ipw (4) - Intel PRO/Wireless 2100 IEEE 802.11b wireless network
iwi (4) - Intel PRO/Wireless 2200BG/2225BG/2915ABG IEEE 802.11a/b/g wireless network
ral (4) - Ralink Technology RT2500 IEEE 802.11a/b/g wireless network
ray (4) - Raytheon Raylink/WebGear Aviator IEEE 802.11FH wireless network
rln (4) - Proxim RangeLAN2 IEEE 802.11b wireless network
rtw (4) - Realtek 8180 IEEE 802.11b wireless network
ural (4) - Ralink Technology RT2570 USB IEEE 802.11a/b/g wireless network
wi (4) - WaveLAN/IEEE, PRISM 2-3, and Spectrum24 IEEE 802.11b wireless network

How does Linux compare? If I get time maybe I'll look into what the vanilla kernel supports and also what 3rd party patches support. :beer:

EDIT: Email with list of hardware with this ralink chip.

Some of those are a bit suspect.. Like Prism2 and prism3. It's kinda like the difference between a PPC g3 vs g4 proccessor, I beleive.

Try this website for documentation on supported wireless devices:
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Jean_Tourrilhes/Linux/



Oh, and REAL documentation comes with the OS and software. Sometimes it's as important as the actual peice of software itself.

It's just one of those things that Linux isn't that hot at, unfortunately.

 

[Sunner]

Bah, wireless is for girlie men, real men use real cables

On a sidenote, and to make this post at least somewhat on topic, it's impressive what the OpenBSD team has done in making vendors open up a bit.
Too bad Intel won't listen, not that I care about wireless stuff, but I'll refrain from buying any Intel hardware as long as I can avoid it.

 

[Nothinman]

Curiosity only. Linux users claim that Linux has better hardware support, but I'm not so sure that's entirely true.

One subset of hardware support doesn't make the claim untrue. The fact that OpenBSD has 10 more wifi drivers in the core kernel is a far, far fetch from "OpenBSD has better hardware support than Linux!". That's a spin I would only expect from Slashdot or The Register.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Curiosity only. Linux users claim that Linux has better hardware support, but I'm not so sure that's entirely true.

One subset of hardware support doesn't make the claim untrue. The fact that OpenBSD has 10 more wifi drivers in the core kernel is a far, far fetch from "OpenBSD has better hardware support than Linux!". That's a spin I would only expect from Slashdot or The Register.

I think the crucial word in my sentence was "entirely." Maybe I'll go through network cards in general next, or gigabit. I expect Linux has a broader range of i386 hardware support in general.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Sunner
Bah, wireless is for girlie men, real men use real cables

On a sidenote, and to make this post at least somewhat on topic, it's impressive what the OpenBSD team has done in making vendors open up a bit.
Too bad Intel won't listen, not that I care about wireless stuff, but I'll refrain from buying any Intel hardware as long as I can avoid it.

I hate dragging cat5 into the bathroom.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: drag
Some of those are a bit suspect.. Like Prism2 and prism3. It's kinda like the difference between a PPC g3 vs g4 proccessor, I beleive.

And they use the same driver.

Try this website for documentation on supported wireless devices:
http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Jean_Tourrilhes/Linux/

I found it, it was too disorganized. Thanks though.